Ateneo 2007 Criminal Law (Book 2) Part 2
Ateneo 2007 Criminal Law (Book 2) Part 2
Ateneo 2007 Criminal Law (Book 2) Part 2
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is an executive officer; The mother of the person in the custody of
2. That he addresses any order or suggestion the public officer is not included.
to any judicial authority; and To solicit means to propose earnestly and
3. That the order or suggestion relates to any persistently something unchaste and immoral
case or business coming within the exclusive to a woman.
jurisdiction of the courts of justice. The advances must be immoral or indecent.
The crime is consummated by mere
Legislative or judicial officers are not liable proposal.
under this article. Proof of solicitation is not necessary
when there is sexual intercourse.
Dismemberment of a dead body is one manner of contemplated upon the mode to insure the killing.
outraging or scoffing at the corpse of the victim. The crime committed by appellant is homicide.
PEOPLE vs. MONTAÑEZ, GR 148257, 3/17/04 GOROSPE vs. PEOPLE, G.R. No. 147974. 1/29/04
The barefaced fact that Daniel Sumaylo pleaded No error was committed by the trial court in
guilty to the felony of homicide is not a bar to the characterizing the felonious assault as frustrated
appellant being found guilty of murder as a principal. homicide and convicting appellant therefor. The
It bears stressing that Sumaylo plea-bargained on his appellant acted with intent to kill in firing the gun at
re-arraignment. Even if the public prosecutor and the Miguel. Usually, the intent to kill is shown by the kind
father of the victim agreed to Sumaylo's plea, the of weapon used by the offender and the parts of the
State is not barred from prosecuting the appellant for victim’s body at which the weapon was aimed, as
murder on the basis of its evidence, independently of shown by the wounds inflicted.
Sumaylo's plea of guilt.
ARADILLOS vs. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No.
135619, 1/15/04
ARTICLE 249. HOMICIDE. An accused may be convicted of slight, less serious
or serious physical injuries in a prosecution for
ELEMENTS: homicide or murder, inasmuch as the infliction of
1. That a person was killed; physical injuries could lead to any of the latter
2. That the accused killed him without any offenses when carried to its utmost degree despite
justifying circumstances; the fact that an essential requisite of the crime of
3. That the accused had the intention to kill, homicide or murder - intent to kill - is not required in a
which is presumed; and prosecution for physical injuries.
4. That the killing was not attended by any of
the qualifying circumstances of murder,
or by that of parricide or infanticide. ARTICLE 250. PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED
PARRICIDE, MURDER OR HOMICIDE.
Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when
death resulted. Hence, evidence of intent to
kill is required only in attempted or frustrated ARTICLE 251. DEATH IN A TUMULTUOUS
homicide. AFFRAY..
There is no crime of frustrated homicide
through negligence/imprudence. ELEMENTS:
When the wounds that caused death were 1. That there be several persons;
inflicted by 2 different persons, even if they 2. That they did not compose groups
were not in conspiracy, each one of them is organized for the common purpose of
guilty of homicide. assaulting and attacking each other
In all crimes against persons in which the reciprocally;
death of the victim is an element, there must 3. That these several persons quarreled and
be satisfactory evidence of (1) the fact of assaulted one another in a confused and
death and (2) the identity of the victim. tumultuous manner;
Penalty shall be one degree higher than that 4. That someone was killed in the course of
imposed by law when the victim is under 12 the affray;
years of age 5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually
Corpus delicti – actual commission of crime killed the deceased; and
charged 6. That the person or persons who inflicted
serious physical injuries or who used
PEOPLE vs. DELA CRUZ, G.R. No. 152176, violence can be identified.
10/1/03
The qualifying circumstance of treachery was not
sufficiently established by the prosecution. The Tumultuous affray exists when at least 4
prosecution witness did not see the actual stabbing of persons take part in it.
the victim. Therefore, there is no way of determining When there are 2 identified groups of men
on how the attack was initiated. In the same way that who assaulted each other, there is no
no testimony would prove that the appellant tumultuous affray.
The person killed need not be a participant in A pregnant woman who tried to commit
the affray suicide by means of poison but instead of
Those who used violence are liable for death dying, the fetus in her womb was expelled, is
caused in a tumultuous affray only if it cannot not liable for abortion.
be determined who inflicted the serious Assistance to suicide is different from mercy-
physical injuries on the deceased killing. Euthanasia or mercy-killing is the
“Tumultuous” in Article 153 – more than three practice of painlessly putting to death a
persons who are armed or provided with person suffering from some incurable
means of violence disease. In this case, the person does not
want to die. A doctor who resorts to
PERSONS LIABLE: euthanasia may be held liable for murder.
1. person/s who inflicted serious physical Penalty is mitigated if suicide is not
injuries successful.
2. if it is not known who inflicted serious
physical injuries on the deceased, all
persons who used violence upon the ARTICLE 254. DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS.
person of the victim.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender discharges a firearm
ARTICLE 252. PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN against or at another person; and
A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY. 2. That the offender has no intention to kill
that person.
ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a tumultuous affray as The offender must shoot at another with any
referred to in the preceding article; firearm without intention of killing him. If the
2. That a participant or some participants firearm is not discharged at a person, the act
thereof suffer serious physical injuries or is not punished under this article.
physical injuries of a less serious nature A discharge towards the house of the victim
only; is not discharge of firearm. Firing a gun at the
3. That the person responsible therefor cannot house of the offended party, not knowing in
be identified; and what part of the house the people were, is
4. That all those who appear to have used only alarm under Art. 155.
violence upon the person of the offended Usually, the purpose of the offender is only to
party are known. intimidate or frighten the offended party.
Intent to kill is negated by the fact that the
Persons liable: All those who have used distance between the victim and the
violence on the person of the offended party. offender is 200 yards.
Injured party must be a participant of the A person can be held liable for discharge
tumultous affray even if the gun was not pointed at the
If the one who caused physical injuries are offended party when it fired as long as it
known, he will be liable for physical injuries was initially aimed at or against the
actually committed offended party.
Slight physical injuries not included
that for murder. In either case, the proper 3. That the violence is intentionally exerted;
qualification for the offense is infanticide. and
When infanticide is committed by the mother 4. That as a result of the violence the fetus
or maternal grandmother of the victim in dies, either in the womb or after having been
order to conceal the mother’s dishonor, expelled therefrom.
such fact is only mitigating.
The delinquent mother who claims that she Committed only by violence(giving of bitter
committed the offense to conceal the substance with no intention to cause abortion
dishonor must be of good reputation. is not unintentional abortion)
Hence, if she is a prostitute, she is not Violence must be intentionally exerted
entitled to a lesser penalty because she has Unintentional abortion may be complexed
no honor to protect. with other crimes such as parricide or
There is no infanticide when the child was homicide
born dead, or although born alive it could not Unintentional abortion can also be
sustain an independent life when it was committed through negligence. (People vs.
killed. Jose)
The accused can only be held liable if he
knew that the woman was pregnant.
ARTICLE 256. INTENTIONAL ABORTION If there is no intention to cause abortion
and neither was violence exerted, Arts.
ELEMENTS: 256 and 257 does not apply.
1. That there is a pregnant woman;
2. That violence is exerted, or drugs or ARTICLE 258. ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE
beverages administered, or that the accused WOMAN HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS.
otherwise acts upon such pregnant woman;
3. That as a result of the use of violence or ELEMENTS:
drugs or beverages upon her, or any other 1. That there is a pregnant woman who has
act of the accused, the fetus dies, either in suffered an abortion;
the womb or after having been expelled 2. That the abortion is intended; and
therefrom. 3. That the abortion is caused by –
4. That the abortion is intended. a. the pregnant woman herself
b. any other person, with her
A fetus about six months old cannot subsist consent, or
by itself, outside the maternal womb. c. any of her parents, with her
Abortion usually means expulsion before 6th consent for the purpose of
month or before term of its viability concealing her dishonor.
Viada: Abortion, as long as fetus dies as a
result of violence used or drugs administered The liability of the pregnant woman is
Infanticide, if: (1) Fetus could sustain mitigated if the purpose is to conceal her
independent life after its separation from dishonor. However, there is no mitigation for
maternal womb, and (2) it is killed the parents of the pregnant women even if
Fetus survives in spite of attempt to kill it or their purpose is to conceal their daughter’s
use of violence: dishonor, unlike in infanticide.
a. Abortion intended, all acts of execution
performed – frustrated intentional
abortion ARTICLE 259. ABORTION PRACTICED BY A
b. Abortion not intended, fetus does not die PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF
– physical injuries ABORTIVES.
No frustrated unintentional abortion
ELEMENTS:
ARTICLE 257. UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION. 1. That there is a pregnant woman who has
suffered an abortion;
ELEMENTS: 2. That the abortion is intended;
1. That there is a pregnant woman; 3. That the offender, who must be a physician
2. That violence is used upon such pregnant or midwife, causes or assists in causing the
woman without intending an abortion; abortion; and
for the acts of hazing committed by the it occurs a second time, and she remains in the
perpetrators; situation, she is defined as a battered woman.
3. The officers, former officers, or alumni of
the organization, group, fraternity or sorority
who actually planned the hazing although
Chapter Three. RAPE
not present when the acts constituting the
hazing were committed shall be liable as
principals.
4. A fraternity or sorority's adviser who is ARTICLE 266A-266B. RAPE
present when the acts constituting the
hazing were committed and failed to take The Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (RA 8353) now
action to prevent the same from occurring classified the crime of rape as a Crime Against
shall be liable as principal. Persons. It incorporated rape into Title 8 of the
RPC.
The presence of any person during the
hazing is prima facie evidence of ELEMENTS:
participation therein as principal unless Rape is committed -
he prevented the commission of the illegal 1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a
acts. woman under any of the following
Any person charged under this provision circumstances:
shall not be entitled to the mitigating a. through force, threat or intimidation;
circumstance that there was no intention b. when the offended party is deprived of
to commit so grave a wrong. reason or otherwise unconscious;
c. by means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority; or
d. when the offended party is under 12 years
of age or is demented, even though none
RA 9262 ANTI–VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
of the circumstances mentioned above be
AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT OF 2004
present.
In rape by sexual assault, the word "instrument or where there are other occupants. The beast in him
object" should be construed to include a human bears no respect for time and place.
finger.
PEOPLE vs. OLAYBAR G.R. Nos. 150630-31.
ORDINARIO vs. PEOPLE G.R. No. 155415. 520/04 101/03
The definition of the crime of rape has been The trial court has decreed the penalty of death on
expanded with the enactment of Republic Act No. account of circumstance under Article 266-A, i.e., that
8353, otherwise known as the Anti-Rape Law of when "the offender knows that he is afflicted with
1997, to include not only "rape by sexual intercourse" Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV), Acquired
but now likewise "rape by sexual assault." An act of Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other
sexual assault under the second paragraph of the sexually transmissible disease and the virus or
article can be committed by any person who, under disease is transmitted to the victim," the imposition of
the circumstances mentioned in the first paragraph of the extreme penalty of death would be warranted.
the law, inserts his penis into the mouth or anal
orifice, or any instrument or object into the genital or PEOPLE vs. DE LA TORRE G.R. Nos. 121213 &
anal orifice, of another person. The law, unlike rape 121216-23. 1/13/04
under the first paragraph of Article 266-A of the An accused may be considered a principal by direct
Code, has not made any distinction on the sex of participation, by inducement, or by indispensable
either the offender or the victim. Neither must the cooperation. This is true in a charge of rape against a
courts make such distinction. woman, provided of course a man is charged
together with her. Thus, in two cases the Court
PEOPLE vs. BALLENO G.R. No. 149075. 8/7/03 convicted the woman as a principal by direct
The fact that no laceration and no ruptured hymen participation since it was proven that she held down
were found in this case, does not necessarily negate the complainant in order to help her co-accused
rape. The fact that the hymen was intact upon spouse consummate the offense.
examination does not, likewise, belie rape, for a
broken hymen is not an essential element of rape, PEOPLE vs. ESPINOSA G.R. No. 138742 6/15/04
nor does the fact that the victim remained a virgin Absence of resistance does not mean consent. The
exclude the crime. complainant was only 14 years old when the rape
took place. At her age, it could easily be conceived
PEOPLE vs. NAVARRO, G.R. No. 137597. that she feared the appellant and believed his
10/24/03 threats, that he would kill her and her family if she
Even the slightest contact of the penis with the labia reported the incident to anyone. The test is whether
under the circumstances enumerated under Art. 266- the threat or intimidation produces a reasonable fear
A of the Revised Penal Code constitutes rape. A in the mind of the victim that if she resists or does not
flaccid penis can do as much damage as an erect yield to the desires of the accused, the threat would
one — at least insofar as the crime of rape is be carried out.
concerned.
PEOPLE vs. MALONES, G.R. Nos. 124388-90.
PEOPLE vs. AGSAOAY, G.R. Nos. 132125-26. 3/11/04
6/3/04 The negative findings of spermatozoa on the medico-
An unchaste woman who habitually goes out with legal report does not prove that no rape was
different men may be a victim of rape. The victim’s committed.
moral character is not among the elements of the
crime of rape. It does not negate the existence of PEOPLE vs. ROTE, G.R. No. 146188, 12/11/03
rape. Where the girl is below 12 years old, the only subject
of inquiry is whether “carnal knowledge” took place.
Proof of force, intimidation or consent is unnecessary
PEOPLE vs. LALINGJAMAN, G.R. No. 132714. since none of these is an element of statutory rape.
6/6/01 There is a conclusive presumption of absence of free
Rape may be committed anywhere — even in places consent of the rape victim is below the age of 12.
where people congregate such as parks, along the
road side, within school premises, and inside a house PEOPLE vs.SABARDAN, G.R. No. 132135. 5/21/04
When the original and primordial intention of the have sex against her will. Definitely a man can
appellant in keeping the victim in his apartment was neither demand sexual gratification from a fiancée
to rape her and not to deprive her of her liberty, the nor employ violence upon her, on the pretext of love.
appellant is guilty only of rape under Article 335,
paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, and not of PEOPLE vs. JOEL AYUDA G.R. No. 128882.
the complex crime of serious illegal detention with 10/2/03
rape under Article 267, in relation to Articles 335 and A "sweetheart defense," to be credible, should be
48 of the Code. substantiated by some documentary or other
evidence of the relationship — like mementos, love
PEOPLE vs. BALATAZO, G.R. No. 118027. 1/29/04 letters, notes, pictures and the like. Here, no such
evidence was ever presented by appellant.
Force or intimidation may be actual or constructive. In
this case, the victim is a mental retardate. The
appellant took advantage of her condition and
PEOPLE vs. ACERO, G.R. Nos. 146690- 91.
succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her.
3/17/04
Hence, he is guilty of forcible rape.
A defense based on “sweetheart theory” in rape
cases is not a defense at all in rape where the victim
PEOPLE vs. FUCIO, G.R. Nos. 151186-95. 2/13/04 is a mental retardate.
The qualifying circumstance of minority and
relationship does not include god-father relationship
PEOPLE vs. OGA, G.R. No. 152302. 6/8/04
Sweetheart theory prevails as a defense in rape
PEOPLE vs. ANCHETA, G.R. No. 142431. 1/14/04 when it casts reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the
To justify the imposition of the death penalty in cases accused.
of incestuous rape, the concurrence of the minority of
the victim and her relationship to the offender
constitutes one special qualifying circumstance which ARTICLE 266-C. EFFECT OF PARDON.
must be both alleged and proved with moral certainty.
Subsequent valid marriage between the offender
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. MAURICIO and the offended party extinguishes the
WATIWA, G.R. No. 139400, September 3, 2003 criminal action or the penalty imposed.
In Qualified Rape, the term “guardian” refers to a A husband may be guilty of raping his wife.
legal guardian as in the case of parents or guardian When the legal husband is the offender,
ad litem or judicial guardian appointed by the court, subsequent forgiveness of the wife
and not merely to an uncommitted caretaker over a extinguishes the criminal action or penalty.
limited period of time. This does not follow if the marriage is void ab
initio.
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. LAMBID G.R. Nos.
133066-67, October 1, 2003
ARTICLE 266-D. PRESUMPTIONS.
The force or violence necessary in rape is a relative
term that depends not only on the age, size, and EVIDENCE WHICH MAY BE ACCEPTED FOR THE
strength of the persons involved but also on their PROSECUTION OF RAPE:
relationship to each other. In a rape committed by a 1. Any physical overt act manifesting resistance
father against his own daughter, the former's parental against the act of rape in any degree from the
authority and moral ascendancy substitutes for offended party; or
violence or intimidation over the latter who, 2. Where the offended party is so situated as to
expectedly, would just cower in fear and resign to the render him/her incapable of giving consent.
father's wicked deeds.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a private individual; ILLEGAL DETENTION ARBITRARY
2. That he kidnaps or detains another, or in any DETENTION
other manner deprives the liberty; Committed by a private Committed by a public
3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must be individual who unlawfully officer or employee who
illegal; and kidnaps, detains or detains a person without
4. That in the commission of the offense, any of the otherwise deprives a legal ground
following circumstances are present ( person of liberty.
detention becomes serious): Crime is against personal Crime against the
a. that the kidnapping/detention lasts for more liberty and security fundamental law of the
than 3 days, State
b. that it is committed by simulating public
authority,
c. that any serious physical injuries are
ARTICLE 268. SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION
inflicted upon the person kidnapped or
detained or threats to kill him are made, or ELEMENTS:
d. that the person kidnapped or detained is a
1. That the offender is a private person;
minor (except if parent is the offender), 2. That he kidnaps or detains another or in any
female or a public officer. other manner deprives the liberty or he
furnishes the place for the perpetuation of the
Death is imposed in the following instances: [death detention;
penalty suspended] 3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must be
1. if kidnapping is committed for the purpose of illegal;
extorting ransom either from the victim or from 4. That the crime is committed without the
any other person even if none of the
attendance of any of the circumstances
aforementioned circumstances are present in the enumerated in Art. 267.
commission of the offense; and
2. when the victim is killed or dies as a
PRIVILEGED MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE:
consequence of the detention or is raped or is If the offender:
subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts. 1. voluntarily releases the person so kidnapped or
detained within 3 days from the commencement
PEOPLE vs. OBESO G.R. No. 152285. 10/24/03 of the detention;
It is true that for kidnapping to take place, it is not 2. without having attained the purpose intended;
necessary that the victim be placed in an enclosure; and
neither is it necessary that the detention be 3. before the institution of criminal proceedings
prolonged. However, the essence of kidnapping is against him.
the actual deprivation of the victim's liberty coupled
with indubitable proof of the intent of the accused to
effect such deprivation. ARTICLE 269. UNLAWFUL ARREST
ELEMENTS:
ELEMENTS: 1. That the offender purchases, sells, kidnaps or
1. That the offender arrests or detains another detains a human being; and
person; 2. That the purpose of the offender is to enslave
2. That the purpose of the offender is to deliver such human being.
him to the proper authorities; and
3. That the arrest or detention is not authorized Qualifying circumstance – if the purpose is some
by law or there is no reasonable ground immoral traffic (Ex. prostitution).
therefor.
ARTICLE 273. EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR
Offender is any person. Either a public officer or
private individual may be liable. ELEMENTS:
Arrest/ detention refers to warrantless arrests. 1. That the offender retains a minor in his service;
In Article 125 (Delay in the delivery of detained 2. That it is against the will of the minor; and
persons to the proper judicial authorities), the 3. That it is under the pretext of reimbursing
detention is for some legal ground. While in an himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant,
unlawful arrest, the detention is not authorized by guardian or person entrusted with the custody of
law. such minor.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the minor is living in the home of his
Chapter Two. CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY
parents or guardians or the person entrusted with
his custody; and
2. That the offender induces a minor to abandon
such home. ARTICLE 275. ABANDONMENT OF PERSON IN
DANGER AND ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S OWN
Inducement must be actual, committed with VICTIM.
criminal intent and determined by a will to
cause damage. ACTS PUNISHABLE:
The minor should not leave his home of his 1. By failing to render assistance to any person
own free will. whom the offender finds in an uninhabited place
Mitigated if committed by the father or mother wounded or in danger of dying, when he can
of the victim. render such assistance without detriment to
The minor need not actually abandon his home himself, unless such omission shall
or home of guardian. Mere commission of any constitute a more serious offense;
act which tends to influence, persuade or prevail
on a minor to abandon his home is what ELEMENTS:
constitutes a crime. a. That place is not inhabited.
b. The accused found there a person wounded
or in danger of dying.
ARTICLE 272. SLAVERY c. The accused can render assistance without
detriment to himself.
ELEMENTS:
Article 280. Trespass to dwelling 4. That the trespasser has not secured the
permission of the owner or the caretaker
ELEMENTS: thereof.
1. That the offender is a private person;
2. That he enters the dwelling of another; and
3. That such entrance is against the latter’s will. ARTICLE 282. GRAVE THREATS
Medina case: When the accused entered the ARTICLE 283. LIGHT THREATS.
dwelling through the window, he had no intent to kill
any person inside. His intention to kill came to his ELEMENTS:
mind when he was being arrested by the occupants 1. That the offender makes a threat to commit a
thereof. Hence, the crime of trespass to dwelling is a wrong;
separate and distinct offense from frustrated 2. That the wrong does not constitute a crime;
homicide. 3. That there is a demand for money or that other
condition is imposed, even though not unlawful.
ARTICLE 281. OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS In light threats, the wrong threatened does not
amount to a crime.
ELEMENTS: Requires that there be a demand of money or
1. That the offender enters the closed premises that other condition be imposed
or the fenced estate of another; Blackmailing may be punished under this
2. That the entrance is made while either of them is provision
uninhabited;
3. That the prohibition to enter be manifest; and
ARTICLE 284. BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR 3. That the seizure of the thing be accomplished by
means of violence or a display of material
The person making the threats under the 2 force producing intimidation; and
preceding articles (grave and light threats) may 4. That the purpose of the offender is to apply the
also be required by the court to give bail same to the payment of the debt.
conditioned upon the promise not to molest the
person threatened. Par. 2
Any other coercion or unjust vexation
ARTICLE 285. OTHER LIGHT THREATS Paragraph 2 of Art. 287 covers unjust vexation.
It includes any human conduct which, although
ACTS PUNISHABLE: not productive of some physical or material
1. By threatening another with a weapon, or by harm would, however, unjustly annoy or vex an
drawing a weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in innocent person.
lawful self-defense. Light coercion under the 1st paragraph of this
2. By orally threatening another, in the heat of article will only be unjust vexation if the 3rd
anger, with some harm constituting a crime, element (employing violence or intimidation) is
without persisting in the idea involved in the absent.
threat.
3. By orally threatening another with harm not
constituting a felony. ARTICLE 288. OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS –
(COMPULSORY PURCHASE OF MERCHANDISE
No demand for money or condition involved AND PAYMENT OF WAGES BY MEANS OF
Threat is not deliberate TOKENS)
ELEMENTS OF NO. 2:
ARTICLE 287. LIGHT COERCIONS 1. That the offender pays the wages due a laborer
or employee employed by him by means of
ELEMENTS of par. 1: tokens or objects
1. That the offender must be a creditor; 2. That those tokens or objects are other than the
2. That he seizes anything belonging to his legal tender currency of the Philippines.
debtor;
3. That such employee or laborer does not 2. That he learns the secrets of his principal or
expressly request that he be paid by means of master in such capacity; and
tokens or objects. 3. That he reveals such secrets.
ARTICLE 289. FORMATION, MAINTENANCE, AND Damage is not required by this article.
PROHIBITION OF COMBINATION OF CAPITAL OR
LABOR THROUGH VIOLENCE OR THREATS ARTICLE 292. REVELATION OF INDUSTRIAL
SECRETS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender employs violence or threats, ELEMENTS:
in such a degree as to compel or force the 1. That the offender is a person in charge,
laborers or employers in the free and legal employee or workman of a manufacturing or
exercise of their industry or work; and industrial establishment;
2. That the purpose is to organize, maintain or 2. That the manufacturing or industrial
prevent coalitions of capital or labor, strike of establishment has a secret of the industry which
laborers or lockout of employees. the offender has learned;
3. If the act shall not constitute a more serious 3. That the offender reveals such secrets; and
offense. 4. That prejudice is caused to the owner.
TITLE TEN
ARTICLE 290. DISCOVERING SECRETS CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
THROUGH SEIZURE OF CORRESPONDENCE
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a private individual or even a
public officer not in the exercise of his official Chapter One. ROBBERY IN GENERAL
function;
2. That he seizes the papers or letters of another;
3. That the purpose is to discover the secrets of
such another person; and ARTICLE 293. WHO ARE GUILTY OF ROBBERY
4. That offender is informed of the contents or the
papers or letters seized. ELEMENTS of robbery IN GENERAL:
1. That there be personal property belonging to
This article is not applicable to parents with another (bienes muebles)
respect to their minor children or to spouses with 2. That there is unlawful taking of that property
respect to the papers or letters of either of them. (apoderamiento or asportacion
Contents of the correspondence need not be 3. That the taking must be with intent to gain;
secret. The purpose of the offender prevails. (animus lucrandi)
Qualifying circumstance: When the offender 4. That there is violence against or intimidation of
reveals the contents of such papers or letters to any person, or force upon anything.
a 3rd person.
This article does not require that the offended Person from whom property was taken need not
party be prejudiced. be the owner. Legal possession is sufficient.
General rule: The identity of the real owner is not
essential so long as the personal property taken
ARTICLE 291. REVEALING SECRETS WITH does not belong to the accused. Exception: If the
ABUSE OF OFFICE crime is robbery with homicide
The taking of personal property must be unlawful
ELEMENTS: in order to constitute robbery. If the property is in
1. That the offender is a manager, employee or the possession of the offender because it was
servant; given to him in trust by the owner, the crime is
estafa.
If taking was lawful, then misappropriated after Intent to gain No intent to gain No intent to
possessionÆ crime may be malversation, gain
(estafa) Immediate Intimidation; Intimidation
As to robbery w/ violence or intimidation, from the harm promises some (effect) is
moment the offender gains possession of the future harm or immediate and
thing even if offender has had no opportunity to injury offended party
dispose of the same, the unlawful taking is is compelled to
complete. do something
As to robbery w/ force upon things, thing must be against his will
taken out of the building in order to consummate (w/n right or
robbery. wrong)
Intent to gain is presumed from unlawful taking of
personal property.
The unlawful taking must not be under the claim
ROBBERY BRIBERY
of title or ownership.
When there is no intent to gain but there is X didn’t commit crime X has committed a crime
violence in the taking, the crime is grave but is intimidated to and gives money as way
coercion. deprive him of his to avoid arrest or
The violence or intimidation must be committed property prosecution
against the person of the offended party, not Deprived of money thru Giving of money is in a
upon the thing taken. force or intimidation sense voluntary
General rule: Violence or intimidation must be Neither Transaction is voluntary
present before the “taking” is complete. and mutual
Exception: When violence results in homicide, Ex. Accused demands payment of P2.00 with threats
rape, intentional mutilation or any of the serious of arrest and prosecution, therefore, robbery because
physical injuries in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Art. 263 (a) intent to gain and (b) immediate harm
(Serious Physical injuries), the taking of the
property is robbery complexed w/ any of these PEOPLE vs. BOCALAN, G.R. No. 141527. 9/4/03
crimes under Art. 294, even if the taking is
already complete when violence was used by the For the appellant to be guilty of consummated
offender. robbery, there must be incontrovertible proof that
Use of force upon things is entrance to the property was taken from the victim. The appellant is
building by means described in Arts. 299 and guilty of attempted robbery only when he commences
302. the commission of robbery directly by overt acts and
When both violence or intimidation and force does not perform all the acts of execution which
upon things concur in committing the crime, it is would produce robbery by reason of some causes or
robbery w/ violence against persons. accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
If not personal property but real property or rights
Æ crime may be usurpation ARTICLE 294. ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE
Theft, not robbery, where accused cut with bolo AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS
the strings tying opening of a sack and then took
the palay ACTS PUNISHED AS ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE
RA 6539 is applicable when property taken in AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS:
robbery is a motor vehicle (Carnapping: taking 1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery,
with intent to gain of motor vehicle belonging to homicide is committed;
another without the latter’s consent, or by means 2. When the robbery is accompanied w/ rape or
of violence against or intimidation of persons or intentional mutilation or arson;
by using force upon things; Unqualified -14years 3. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any
and 8 months to 17 years and 4 months; of the physical injuries resulting in insanity,
violence/force upon things -17 years and 4 imbecility, impotency, or blindness is inflicted;
months to 30 years; occupant killed or raped – 4. When by reason of or on occasion of the robbery,
reclusion perpetua to death) serious physical injuries resulting in the loss of
the use of speech, or the power to hear or to
ROBBERY GRAVE GRAVE smell, or the loss of an eye, hand, foot, arm,
W/ THREATS COERCION leg, or the loss of the use of any such member
VIOLENCE
or incapacity for work in w/c victim is habitually Well entrenched in this jurisprudence is the doctrine
engaged is inflicted; that when homicide takes place as a consequence or
5. If the violence / intimidation employed in on occasion a robbery, all those who took part in the
committing the robbery shall have been carried robbery are guilty as principals in the special complex
to a degree clearly unnecessary for the crime; crime of robbery with homicide, even if they did not
6. When in the course of its execution, offender actually took part in the homicide. The only exception
inflicts upon any person not responsible for the is when it is clearly shown that the accused
commission of robbery any of the physical endeavored to prevent the unlawful killing.
injuries resulting to deformity, loss of any part
of the body or the use thereof, or illness or
incapacity for the performance of the work for PEOPLE vs. HIJADA, G.R. No. 123696. 311/04
> 90 days or > 30 days; There is no crime of Robbery with Multiple Homicide
7. If the violence employed does not cause any under the Revised Penal Code. The crime is Robbery
serious physical injuries defined in Art. 263, or with Homicide notwithstanding the number of
if offender employs intimidation only. homicides committed on the occasion of the robbery
and even if murder, physical injuries and rape were
SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIMES WITH SPECIFIC also committed on the same occasion.
PENALTIES PRESCRIBED:
1. Robbery with homicide is committed if original
design is robbery and homicide was committed ARTICLE 295. ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL
although homicide precedes the robbery by an INJURIES, COMMITTED IN AN UNINHABITED
appreciable time. If original design is not robbery PLACE AND BY A BAND, OR WITH THE USE OF
but robbery was committed after homicide as FIREARM ON THE STREET, ROAD, OR ALLEY
an afterthought, offender committed 2 separate
offenses of robbery and homicide. The crime QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES IN ROBBERY
is still robbery with homicide if the person killed WITH VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION OF
was an innocent bystander and not the person PERSONS:
robbed and even if the death supervened by If any of the offenses defined in subdivisions 3, 4 and
mere accident. 5 of Art. 294 is committed -
2. In robbery with rape, the intent to commit 1. in an uninhabited place, or
robbery must precede rape. Prosecution of the 2. by a band, or
crime need not be by the offended party and 3. by attacking a moving train, street car,
the fiscal can sign the information. When rape motor vehicle or airship, or
and homicide co-exist in a robbery, rape should 4. by entering the passenger’s compartments
be considered as aggravating only and the in a train, or in any manner taking the
crime is still robbery with homicide. passengers thereof by surprise in the
3. Robbery with intimidation is committed when respective conveyances, or
the acts done by the accused, by their own 5. on a street, road, highway or alley and the
nature or by reason of the circumstances, inspire intimidation is made with the use of firearms.
fear in the person against whom the acts are
directed. The qualifying circumstances of robbery with
violence or intimidation must be alleged in the
PEOPLE vs. COMILING, G.R. No. 140405. 3/4/04 information and proved during the trial.
Being qualifying circumstances, they cannot be
As correctly stressed by the Solicitor General,
offset by generic mitigating circumstances.
robbery with homicide is a “special complex crime.” It
This article will not apply to the special
is enough that in order to sustain a conviction for this
complex crimes of robbery w/ homicide, w/
crime, the killing, which is designated as “homicide,”
rape, or w/ serious physical injuries under
has a direct relation to the robbery, regardless of
paragraph 1 of Art. 263.
whether the latter takes place before or after the
killing. For as long as the killing occurs during or
because of the heist, even if the killing is merely
ARTICLE 296. DEFINITION OF A BAND AND
accidental, robbery with homicide is committed.
PENALTY INCURRED BY MEMBERS THEREOF.
When at least four armed malefactors take part in ELEMENTS of robbery with force upon things
the commission of a robbery, it is deemed committed under subdivision (a):
by a band. 1. That the offender entered (a) an inhabited
house, or (b) public building, or (c) edifice
Requisites for liability for the acts of the other devoted to religious worship;
members of the band: 2. That the entrance was effected by any of the
1. That the accused was a member of the following means:
band; a. Through an opening not intended for
2. That he was present at the commission of a entrance or egress,
robbery by that band; b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or
3. That the other members of the band breaking any door or window,
committed an assault; and c. By using false keys, picklocks or
4. That he did not attempt to prevent the similar tools, or
assault. d. By using any fictitious name or
Conspiracy is presumed when 4 or more armed pretending the exercise of public
persons committed robbery. authority; and
In robbery committed by a band, all are liable for 3. That once inside the building, the offender
any assault committed by the band, unless the took personal property belonging to
others attempted to prevent the assault. another with intent to gain.
False key must have been used in opening ARTICLE 300. ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED
house and not any furniture inside. Otherwise, PLACE AND BY A BAND.
the crime is only theft.
General Rule: If false key/picklock was used to Robbery in an inhabited house, public building or
open an inside door (Ex. door of a room) and edifice devoted to religious worship is qualified
offender took personal property, the crime is only when committed by a band and in an
theft. uninhabited place.
Exception: If the room is a separate dwelling
place, crime is robbery. ARTICLE 301. WHAT IS AN INHABITED HOUSE,
The use of fictitious name or the act of pretending PUBLIC BUILDING OR BUILDING DEDICATED TO
to exercise authority must be committed for the RELIGIOUS WORSHIP AND THEIR
purpose of entering the building. DEPENDENCIES
ELEMENTS of robbery with force upon things Dependencies of an inhabited house, public
under subdivision (b): building or building dedicated to religious worship
1. That the offender is inside a dwelling house, are all interior courts, corrals, warehouses,
public building, or edifice devoted to religious granaries or enclosed places:
worship, regardless of the circumstances 1. contiguous to the building, having an
under which he entered it; and interior entrance connected therewith, and
2. That the offender takes personal property 2. forming part of the whole.
belonging to another with intent to gain, A garage, in order to be considered as a
under any of the following circumstances: dependency of a house, must have the 3
a. by the breaking of doors, wardrobes, foregoing requirements.
chests, or any other kind of locked or
sealed furniture or receptacle, or
b. by taking such furniture or objects ARTICLE 302. ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED
away to be broken or forced open PLACE OR IN A PRIVATE BUILDING.
outside the place of the robbery.
ELEMENTS:
It is not necessary that entrance was made 1. That the offender entered an uninhabited
through any of the means mentioned in place or a building which was not a
subdivision (a). dwelling house, not a public building, or
Offender may be servants or guests. not an edifice devoted to religious
Destruction of keyhole of cabinet is robbery worship;
under this subsection. 2. That any of the following circumstances was
When sealed box is taken out for the purpose of present:
breaking it, crime is already consummated a. That entrance was effected through an
robbery. There is no need to actually open it opening not intended for entrance or
inside the building from where it was taken. egress,
But if the box was confided into the custody of b. A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or
accused and he takes the money contained window was broken,
therein, the crime is estafa. c. The entrance was effected through the
The crime is theft if the box was found outside use of false keys, picklocks or other
of the building and the accused forced it open. similar tools,
d. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or
Mitigating circumstance: closed furniture or receptacle was
1. Offenders do not carry arms and the value of broken; or
the property taken exceeds 250 pesos. e. A closed or sealed receptacle was
2. Offenders are armed, but the value does not removed, even if the same be broken
exceed 250 pesos. open elsewhere; and
3. Offenders do not carry arms and the value 3. That with intent to gain, the offender took
does not exceed 250 pesos Æ penalty of a) therefrom personal property belonging to
or b) in minimum period. another.
4. Committed in dependencies
This article covers the second kind of robbery
with force upon things.
P. D. No. 532 defines brigandage as the seizure he took personal property of another with intent
of any person for: (a) ransom; (b) extortion or to gain.
other unlawful purpose; or (c) the taking away of Trust, Commission, Administration: Juridical
property by violence or intimidation or force upon possession of thing transferred to another
things or other unlawful means, committed by If only custody of object (i.e. only material
any person on any Philippine highway. possession) was given to the accused and it is
actually taken by him with no intent to return, the
The Anti-Carnapping Act defines crime is theft. But if juridical possession is
carnapping as the taking, with intent to gain, transferred (Ex., by a contract of bailment) is
of a motor vehicle belonging to another given to the accused and he takes the property
without the latter’s consent, or by means of with intent to gain, the crime is estafa.
Personal property: includes electricity and gas,
violence against or intimidation of persons,
promissory note and check. Ex. the inspector
or by using force upon things. This law also misreads the meter to profit thereby, or one using
penalizes the defacing or tampering with the a jumper
original serial number of motor vehicle Consent: freely given and not merely lack of
engines, engine blocks, and chassis. objection
Allegation in the information of the lack of the
owner’s consent is important.
Finder: may be a finder in law
Chapter Three. THEFT Theft is consummated when the offender is able
to place the thing taken under his control and in
such a situation as he could dispose of it at once
(although there is actually no opportunity to
dispose).
Servant using his employer’s car without
ARTICLE 308. THEFT permission is guilty of qualified theft although his
use thereof was only temporary. However, Reyes
says that there must be some character of
ELEMENTS: permanency in depriving owner of the use of the
1. That there be taking of personal property; object and making himself the owner. Therefore,
2. That said property belongs to another; “joyride” must be deemed as qualified theft.
3. That the taking be done with intent to gain; An employee taking his salary before it is actually
4. That the taking be done without the delivered to him is guilty of theft.
consent of the owner; and If the offender, in good faith, claims property as
5. That the taking be accomplished without the his own, no theft is committed although his
use of violence against or intimidation of claim of ownership is later found to be untrue.
persons or force upon things. However, if his claim is in bad faith, he is guilty of
theft.
“Taking”: if bulky, must be taken away(when
place surrounded by fence or wall), otherwise, PERSONS LIABLE FOR THEFT:
the moment he had full possession of thing, 1. Those who:
asportation is complete; does not need a a. with intent to gain,
character of permanency b. but w/o violence against or intimidation of
Intent to Gain – taking must be accompanied by persons nor force upon things
intention, at the time of taking, of withholding the c. take
thing with character of permanency; presumed d. personal property
from unlawful taking of personal property of e. of another
another f. w/o the latter’s consent.
Gain desired by the offender may not only be
money. It may include satisfaction, use, pleasure 2. Those who:
or any benefit; includes satisfaction of taking a. having found lost property,
revenge b. fail to deliver the same to the local
It is not required that the offender realized authorities or its owner.
actual gain in committing theft. It is sufficient that
Retention of money/property found is theft. What 2. Extracting or removing the gold from such
is punished is retention or failure to return with ores or rocks and treat such ores and rocks
intent to gain. to recover and extract the gold therefrom
The offender’s knowledge of the identity of the without the consent of the operator of the
owner of the property is not required. His mining claim.
knowledge that the property is lost is enough.
The finder of the lost property is liable for his HIGHGRADING – selling
deliberate failure to return the lost property, he
knowing that the property does not belong to him. P.D. NO. 401 PUNISHES THE USE OF TAMPERED
WATER OR ELECTRICAL METERS TO STEAL
3. Those who: WATER OR ELECTRICITY.
a. after having maliciously damaged the ACTS PUNISHABLE:
property of another, 1. unauthorized installation of water, electrical
b. remove or make use of the fruits or or telephone connections,
object of the damage caused by them. 2. the use of tampered water or electrical
Killing the cattle of another which destroyed meters to steal water or electricity,
his(offender’s) property and getting meat for 3. the stealing or pilfering of water and/or
himself is theft. electrical meters, electric and/or telephone
wires, and
4. Those who hunting, fishing or gathering 4. knowingly possessing stolen or pilfered water
fruits, etc. in enclosed estate and/or electrical meters, and stolen or
pilfered electric and/or phone wires.
The fishing in this article is not in the fishpond The basis of the penalty in theft is: (1) the value
or fishery. If the fish is taken from a fishpond or of the thing stolen, and in some cases, (2) the
a fishery, the crime is qualified theft. value and also the nature of the property taken,
or (3) the circumstances or causes that impelled
the culprit to commit the crime.
P.D. NO. 534 PUNISHES ILLEGAL FISHING
COMMITTED BY–
1. Any person to catch, take or gather or cause
to be caught, taken or gathered fish in ARTICLE 310. QUALIFIED THEFT
Philippine waters with the use of explosives,
obnoxious or poisonous substances or by Theft is qualified if -
the use of electricity; and 1. It is committed by a domestic servant, or
2. Any person who knowingly possesses, 2. Committed with grave abuse of confidence,
deals in, sells or in any manner disposes or
of, for profit, any fish, fishery/aquatic 3. The property stolen is a:
products w/c have been illegally caught. a. motor vehicle,
b. mail matter,
P.D. NO. 581 PUNISHES “HIGHGRADING” OR c. large cattle,
THEFT OF GOLD COMMITTED BY – d. coconut from the premises of a
1. Taking gold-bearing ores from a mining claim plantation,
or mining camp, or removing, collecting or e. fish from a fishpond or fishery, or
gathering gold-bearing ores or rocks in place;
Estafa with Abuse of Malversation There must be evidence that the pretense of the
Confidence accused that he possesses power/influence is
Offenders are entrusted Offenders are false.
with funds or property & is entrusted with funds or
a continuing offense property & is a ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY POSTDATING A
continuing offense CHECK OR ISSUING A CHECK IN PAYMENT OF
Funds: always private Funds: public funds or AN OBLIGATION:
property 1. That the offender postdated a check, or
issued a check in payment of an obligation;
Offender: private Offender: public
and
individual, or public officer accountable for
2. That such postdating or issuing a check was
officer not accountable public funds
done when the offender had no funds in the
for public funds
bank or his funds deposited therein were not
Committed by Committed by
sufficient to cover the amount of the check.
misappropriating, appropriating, taking,
converting, denying misappropriating
Good faith is a defense in a charge of estafa by
having received money
postdating or issuing a check.
The drawer’s failure to deposit the amount
necessary to cover the issued check within 3
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY TAKING UNDUE days from notice of dishonor is prima facie
ADVANTAGE OF THE SIGNATURE IN BLANK: evidence of deceit.
1. That the paper with the signature of the If the check was issued in payment of pre-
offended party be in blank; existing debt, there is no estafa.
2. That the offended party should have Offender must be able to obtain something
delivered it to offender; from the offended party by means of the check
3. That above the signature of the offended he issues and delivers.
party a document is written by the offender If postdating a check issued as mere
without authority to do so; and guarantee/promissory note, there is no estafa.
4. That the document so written creates a
liability of, or causes damage to, the
offended party or any third person.
If the paper with signature in blank was stolen, B.P. 22 (BOUNCING CHECKS LAW)
the crime is falsification if the offender made it
appear that the victim participated in a
ELEMENTS of offense defined in the 1st PAR. of check was not issued for account or value.
Sec.1 of BP 22: (Wong vs. CA, 2001)
1. That a person makes or draws and issues BP22 does not state that the issuer must
any check; maintain funds for only 90 days. That the check
2. That the check is made or drawn and issued must be deposited within 90 days is merely one
to apply on account or for value; of the conditions for the presumption of
3. That the person who makes or draws and knowledge of insufficiency. It is not an element of
issues the check knows at the time of issue the offense. Where presentment was after 90
that he does not have sufficient funds in or days, only the presumption was lost. Knowledge
credit with the drawee bank for the payment could still be proven by evidence. By current
of such check in full upon its presentment; banking practice, the check must be presented
4. That the check is subsequently dishonored within 180 days. Afterwards it becomes stale.
by the drawee bank for insufficiency of funds Presentment after 180 days is then a defense.
or credit, or would have been dishonored (Wong vs. CA)
for the same reason had not the drawee, Payee’s knowledge of insufficiency of funds is
without any valid reason, ordered the bank to immaterial, because deceit is not an element of
stop payment. BP22. The exception is when there was no
intention to apply said checks for account or for
ELEMENTS of offense defined in the 2nd PAR of vale. (Young vs. CA, 2005)
Se.c.1 of BP 22: Responsibility under BP22 is personal to the
1. That a person has sufficient funds in or accused. Hence, the notice must also be
credit with the drawee bank when he makes personal. Thus, if the issuer is a corp. officer,
or draws and issues a check; notice to the corp. is not notice to the officer.
2. That he fails to keep sufficient funds or to (Marigomen vs. People, 2005)
maintain a credit to cover the full amount of
the check if presented within a period of Notes on SC Admin. Circular 12-2000:
90 days from the date appearing thereon; 1. The circular provides that in a BP22
and conviction, the judge, in his discretion, may
3. That the check is dishonored by the drawee impose fine alone, without imprisonment.
bank. 2. The fine should be not less than but nor
more than double the amount of the
Evidence of knowledge of insufficiency of funds: dishonored checks.
1. Making, drawing and issuance of check 3. The circular is not a penal law, hence there is
which is refused no retroactivity in favor of the accused. The
2. Prima facie evidence of knowledge of circular applies only to cases pending at its
insufficiency of funds; Requisites: effectivity. (Joya vs. Galvez, 2003)
a. Check presented within 90 days, 4. The circular merely lays down a rule of
b. Dishonored, and preference. It does not amend BP22. It
c. c. Failure to make good the check within merely urges the courts to take into account
5 banking days after receiving written not only the purpose of the law but also the
notice of dishonor circumstances of the accused—whether
he acted in good faith or on clear mistake of
The presumption of knowledge can exist only faith without taint of negligence. Thus,
after it is proved that the issuer had received the imprisonment may still be imposed. (Joya vs.
notice of dishonor. The prosecution must prove Galvez, 2003)
receipt, i.e. registered mail, or authenticated Absence of the notice merely prevents the
signature on registry return receipt. The registry presumption of knowledge of insufficiency. The
receipt alone is insufficient. Testimony or affidavit prosecution must then prove knowledge with
of person mailing the letter is required. (Ting vs. evidence. Thus, the notice is NOT a prerequisite
CA, 2000) for a BP22 prosecution. (Young vs. CA, 2005)
Verbal notice of dishonor is insufficient. Must be
written. (Domagsang vs. CA, 2000)
What the law prohibits is issuance. The purpose
or conditions of issuance is immaterial. Issuance
is malum prohibitum. That the check was
issued as a guarantee is immaterial, unless the
DESTRUCTIVE ARSON:
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum ARTICLE 326. MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
period to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon
any person who shall burn: ELEMENTS:
1. Building or Edifice 1. That the offender deliberately caused
2. Building Open to Public damage to the property of another;
2. That such act does not constitute arson or 4. Damage to property of National Museum or
other crimes involving destruction; and National Library, archive, registry,
3. That the act damaging another’s property be waterworks, road, promenade, or any other
committed merely for the sake of damaging thing used in common by the public.
it. Qualified malicious mischief is different from
sedition because the element of tumultuous
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF: willful damaging of uprising is not present in the former crime.
another’s property for the sake of causing
damage due to hate, revenge or other evil motive
Malicious mischief cannot be committed ARTICLE 329. OTHER MISCHIEFS
through negligence because the offender acts
with a specific desire to inflict injury to another. Mischiefs not included in Art. 328 are punished
If there is no malice in causing injury, the according to the value of the damage caused.
offender incurs only civil liability. Ex. scattering human excrement in public
Damage caused may also be a diminution in building, killing of cow as an act of revenge, A
value of the property. servant who released bird from cage as act of
But if the offender used the property after hate against owner
causing damage to it, the crime is theft.
Damage in malicious mischief must not result
from a crime. (Ex. Breaking windows during ARTICLE 330. DAMAGE AND OBSTRUCTION TO
robbery is not malicious mischief.) MEANS OF COMMUNICATION
A person charged with malicious mischief may be
found guilty of damage to property through This crime is done by damaging railways,
reckless imprudence telegraph or telephone lines.
Railway system – includes electric wires, traction
VALEROSO vs. PEOPLE G.R. No. 149718. 0/29/03 cables, signal system, and other things pertaining
to railways
The elements of the crime of malicious mischief Removing rails from a railway track to cause
under Article 327 of the Revised Penal Code are: (1) destruction constitutes crime involving
That the offender deliberately caused damage to the destruction under Art. 324.
property of another; (2) That such act does not Art. 330 is not applicable when the damaged
constitute arson or other crimes involving destruction; telegraph/phone lines do not pertain to a railway
(3) That the act of damaging another's property be system. Hence, cutting telephone lines or those
committed merely for the sake of damaging it. As to for transmission of electric power/light not
the third element, petitioner was not justified in pertaining to railways is not covered by this
summarily and extrajudicially demolishing private article.
complainant's structure. As it is, the petitioner If people are killed as a result of the damage
proceeded proceeded not so much to safeguard the caused and the offender had no intent to kill, the
lot as it is the vent to his anger and disgust over the crime is damages to means of communication
“no tresspassing” sign he placed thereon. Indeed, his with homicide. If there is intent to kill and
act of summarily demolishing the house smacks of damaging the railways was the means to
his pleasure in causing damage to it. accomplish the criminal purpose, the crime is
murder.
If the damage shall result in any derailment of
cars, collision or other accident, a higher penalty
shall be imposed.
ARTICLE 328. SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS Derailment of cars should not have been
MISCHIEF purposely sought for
honest persons, and gives occasion to the 1. In Grave Coercion, the compulsion is the
neighbors’ spiritual damage and ruin. crime itself but it is merely a means to
COHABIT means to dwell together, in the commit Acts of Lasciviousness
manner of husband and wife, for some period of 2. The difference between Acts of
time, as distinguished from occasional, transient Lasciviousness and Unjust Vexation is that in
interviews for unlawful intercourse. the former there is lewd design – this can be
That woman must be taken into conjugal dwelling inferred from circumstances surrounding the
as a concubine commission of the crime: place, time,
People in the vicinity are the best witnesses to presence of other people, what was done;
prove scandalous circumstances But if it is clear that intention is to have
Adultery is more severely punished than intercourse, crime could be attempted rape; if
concubinage accused desisted in the commission of
attempted rape, it may be a consummated
crime of acts of lasciviousness
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender contracted marriage; and
Chapter Two. ILLEGAL MARRIAGES 2. That he knew at the time that -
a. the requirements of the law were not
complied with, or
b. the marriage was in disregard of a legal 2. That the imputation must be made publicly;
impediment. 3. That it must be malicious;
4. That the imputation must be directed at a
Circumstance qualifying the offense: if either of natural or juridical person, or one who is
the contracting parties obtains the consent of the dead;
other by means of violence, intimidation or 5. That the imputation must tend to cause the
fraud. dishonor, discredit or contempt of the
person defamed.
ARTICLE 351. PREMATURE MARRIAGES
Libel is a public and malicious imputation of a
PERSONS LIABLE: crime, or a vice or defect, real or imaginary or
1. A widow who married within 301 days from any act, commission, condition, status or
the date of the death of her husband, or circumstances tending to cause the dishonor,
before having delivered if she is pregnant discredit or contempt of a natural or juridical
at the time of his death. person, or to blacken the memory of one who is
2. A woman whose marriage having been dead.
dissolved or annulled, married before her Kinds of malice: (a) malice in law – that which
delivery or w/in 301 days after the date of the should be proved, or (b) malice in fact – that
legal separation. which may be taken for granted due to the
grossness of the imputation.
The purpose of the law in punishing the foregoing Defamation is the proper term for libel as used in
acts is to prevent doubtful paternity. Article 353
Defamation: may be libel or slander
ARTICLE 352. PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL No distinction between calumny, insult, and libel:
MARRIAGE CEREMONY all kinds of attack against honor and reputation is
punished
1. Act punished: performance or authorization by a Malice is presumed to exist in injurious
priest or minister of any religious denomination or publications.
sect or by civil authorities of any illegal marriage Publication is the communication of the
ceremony. defamatory matter to some third person/s.
2. But a clergyman who performed a marriage Person libeled must be identified. But the
ceremony without knowledge of the minority of publication need not refer by name to the libeled
one of the parties is not liable. party. If not named it must be shown that the
description of the person referred to in the
defamatory publication was sufficiently clear so
that at least a 3rd person would have identified
the offended party.
TITLE THIRTEEN
Meaning of writer immaterial
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR Defamatory remarks directed at a group of
persons are not actionable unless the
statements are all embracing or sufficiently
specific for each victim to be identifiable.
There are as many counts of libel as there are
Chapter One. LIBEL persons defamed.
To presume publication, there must be a
reasonable probability that the alleged libelous
matter was thereby exposed to be read or seen
by 3rd persons.
ARTICLE 353. DEFINITION OF In libel, the false accusation need not be made
LIBEL/DEFAMATION under oath. Perjury requires that the false
accusation is made under oath.
ELEMENTS: Seditious libel is punished under Article 142
1. That there must be an imputation of a crime,
or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or Criteria to determine whether statements are
any act, omission, condition, status, or defamatory:
circumstance;
1. Words are calculated to induce the hearers Prosecution must prove malice in fact to convict
to suppose and understand that the person the accused in case of qualified privileged
against whom they are uttered were guilty of communication
certain offenses, or are sufficient to The privilege simply does away with presumption
impeach their honesty, virtue or reputation, of malice
or to hold the person up to public ridicule; Absolute Privileged Communication: not
and (US v O’Connel) actionable even if done in bad faith – statements
2. Words are construed not only as to the made by members of Congress in discharge of
expression used but also with respect to the functions, Judicial Proceedings when pertinent
whole scope and apparent object of the and relevant to subject of inquiry
writer. (People vs. Encarnacion) Qualified privilege is lost by proof of malice
Applying to wrong person due to honest mistake
does not take case out of the privilege
ARTICLE 354. REQUIREMENT OF PUBLICITY. Unnecessary publicity destroys good faith
Defense of privileged communication in
Kinds of privileged communication: paragraph 1: will be rejected if it is shown that
1. Absolutely privileged – not actionable even accused acted with malice in fact and there is no
if the actor has acted in bad faith; reasonable ground for believing the charge to be
2. Qualifiedly privileged – those which, true(for example, no personal investigation made;
although containing defamatory imputations, probable cause in belief is sufficient)
are not actionable unless made with Malice in fact: rivalry or ill-ffeling existing at date
malice or bad faith. of publication, intention to injure the reputation of
offended party, motivated by hate and revenge
General Rule: Every defamatory imputation is In proceedings, communication/ pleadings/others
presumed malicious, even if it be true, if no good must be pertinent and material to subject matter
intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown. to be covered by privilege
Exceptions: Only matters which are not confidential in nature
1. private communication in performance of legal, may be published
moral or social duty Defamatory remarks and comments on the
2. Requisites: conduct or acts of public officers which are
a. That the person who made the related to the discharge of their official duties will
communication had a legal, moral or social not constitute libel if defendant proves the truth of
duty to make the communication or at least imputation; any attack upon private character on
he had an interest to be upheld; matters not related to discharge of official duties
b. That the communication is addressed to an may be libelous
officer or a board, or superior, having some Conduct related to discharge of duties of public
interest or duty on the matter; and officers are matters of public interest
c. That the statements in the communication Mental, moral and physical fitness of candidates
are made in good faith without malice in fact. for public office may be object of criticism;
3. fair and true report of official proceedings, criticism – does not follow a public man into his
made in good faith, without any comments private life and domestic concerns
and remarks Statements made in self defense or in mutual
4. Requisites: controversy are often privileged; person libeled is
a. That the publication of a report of an official justified to hit back with another libel
proceeding is a fair and true report of a However, retaliation and vindictiveness cannot be
judicial, legislative, or other official basis of self-defense in defamation; self-defense
proceedings which are not of confidential must be on matters related to imputations made
nature, or of a statement, report, or speech on person invoking defense
delivered in said proceedings, or of any other He who published what is true, and in good faith
act performed by a public officer in the and for justifiable ends, incurs no responsibility
exercise of his functions;
b. That it is made in good faith; and
c. That it is made without any comments or
R. A. No. 4200
remarks
The Anti-Wire Tapping Act
2. Any person, whether or not a participant in the • BLACKMAIL as any unlawful extortion of money
above-mentioned acts: by threats of accusation and exposure is possible
a. knowingly possesses any tape record, wire in the crimes of light threats (Art. 283) and in
record, disc record, or any other such record threat to publish libel (Art 356).
or copies thereof of any communication or
spoken word; or
b. replays the same for any other person/s; or ARTICLE 357. PROHIBITED PUBLICATION OF
c. communicates the contents thereof, either ACTS REFERRED TO IN THE COURSE OF
verbally or in writing, to any other person; or OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
d. furnishes transcriptions thereof, whether
complete or partial, to any other person. ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a reporter, editor or
A peace officer is exempt from liability if his acts manager of a newspaper, daily or
were done under lawful order of the court. magazine;
However, he can only use the recording for the 2. That he publishes facts connected with the
case for which it was validly requested. private life of another; and
Information obtained in violation of the Act is 3. That such facts are offensive to the honor,
inadmissible in evidence in any hearing or virtue and reputation of said person.
investigation.
An extension phone is not one of those • The prohibition to publish applies even such
prohibited under R.A. 4200. There must be publication be made in connection w/ or under
either a physical interruption through the wiretap the pretext that it is necessary in the narration of
or the deliberate installation of a device or any judicial or administrative proceedings
arrangement in order to overhear, intercept or wherein such facts have been mentioned.
record the spoken words. • Art. 357 constitutes the “Gag law” which bars
from publication news reports on cases
pertaining to adultery, divorce, issues about
the legitimacy of children, etc.
ARTICLE 355. LIBEL BY MEANS OF WRITINGS • Source of news report may not be revealed
OR SIMILAR MEANS. unless court or Congress finds such revelation is
demanded by the security of the State
The means by which libel may be committed are
writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio,
phonograph, painting, theatrical or
cinematographic exhibitions, or any similar ARTICLE 358. SLANDER/ ORAL DEFAMATION.
means.
Use of amplifier Æ slander KINDS OF ORAL DEFAMATION:
Television program Æ libel 1. Grave slander - defamation is of a serious
Penalty is in addition to civil liability and insulting nature;
Libel may be absorbed in crime of threats if intent 2. Simple slander - light insult or defamation.
to threaten is principal aim and object
FACTORS THAT DETERMINE GRAVITY OF THE 3. The editor or business manager of a daily
OFFENSE: newspaper magazine or serial publication; and
1. expressions used 4. The owner of the printing plant which
2. personal relations of the accused and the publishes a libelous article with his consent
offended party, and all other persons, who in any way
3. circumstances surrounding the case, and participate in or have connection with its
4. social standing and position of the victim. publication.
Words uttered in the heat of anger constitute light VENUE OF CRIMINAL AND CIVIL ACTION FOR
oral defamation. DAMAGES IN CASES OF WRITTEN
If the utterances were made publicly and were DEFAMATION:
heard by many people and the accused at the 1. where the libelous article is printed and 1st
same time pointed his finger at the complainant, published, or
oral defamation is committed. 2. where any of the offended parties actually
resides at the time of the commission of the
offense, or
3. where one of the offended parties is a
ARTICLE 359. SLANDER BY DEED public officer:
a. if his office is in the City of Manila, with
ELEMENTS: the RTC of Manila, or the city/province
1. That the offender performs any act not where the article is printed and 1st
included in any other crime against published
honor; b. otherwise, with the RTC of the
2. That such act is performed in the presence city/province where he held office at the
of other person or persons; and time of offense; or where the article is 1st
3. That such act casts dishonor, discredit or published, or
contempt upon the offended party. 4. where one of the offended parties is a
private individual, with the RTC of
province/city where he actually resides at
Seriousness of slander by deed depends on the the time of the crime or where the article
social standing of offended party, the was printed or 1st published.
circumstances surrounding the act, the occasion
Distinctions: Complaint for defamation imputing a private
1. Unjust vexation - irritation or annoyance; crime (i.e. adultery, concubinage, seduction,
anything that annoys or irritates without abduction, and acts of lasciviousness) must be
justification. filed by the offended party.
2. Slander by deed - irritation or annoyance + Person who publishes libelous letter written by
attendant publicity and dishonor or offended party is liable (publishing and not
contempt. composing is the prime requisite of crime)
3. Acts of lasciviousness - irritation or Liability of editor is same as author
annoyance + any of the 3 circumstance Limitations of venue: in order to minimize
provided in Art. 335 on rape (i.e. use of force interference with public function if a public officer,
or intimidation; deprivation of reason or and also to avoid unnecessary harassment of
rendering the offended unconscious; or if accused(to limit out-of-town libel suits)
offended party was under 12 years old, Actual damages need not be proved where
together with lewd designs) publication is libelous per se
Action for exemplary damages may be awarded if
action is based on quasi-delict
ARTICLE 360. PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR No remedy for damages for slander or libel in
LIBEL case of absolutely privileged communication
PERSONS LIABLE:
1. The person who publishes, exhibits or ARTICLE 361. PROOF OF THE TRUTH
causes the publication or exhibition of any
defamation in writing or similar means;
2. The author or editor of a book or pamphlet;
another, is suddenly placed in an emergency and a. Committed with the use of a deadly
compelled to act instantly to avoid a collision or weapon or by two or more persons
injury is not guilty of negligence if he makes a b. When by reason or on the occasion of
choice which a person of ordinary prudence the rape, the victim has become insane
placed in such a position might make even c. When the rape is attempted or
though he did not make the wisest choice. frustrated and a homicide is
Violation of a rule or regulation or law is proof of committed by reason or on the occasion
negligence thereof
d. Committed with attendant
circumstances
Negligence Imprudence 11. Plunder (R. A. 7080)
Deficiency of Perception Deficiency of Action 12. Violations of Dangerous Drugs Act
Failure in advertence Failure in Precaution 13. Carnapping (R. A. 6539)
Avoided by Paying Taking necessary
proper attention and precaution once GENERAL RULE: The death penalty shall be
using due diligence in foreseen imposed in all cases upon which it must be imposed
foreseeing them under existing laws.
EXCEPTIONS (In which cases the penalty shall be
reduced to reclusion perpetua):
1. when the guilty person is below 18 years of
age at the time of the commission of the
crime;
OTHER SPECIAL PENAL LAWS 2. when the guilty person is more than 70
years of age;
3. when upon appeal or automatic review of the
case by the Supreme Court, the required
majority vote is not obtained for the
HEINOUS CRIMES ACT OF 1993 imposition of the death penalty,
(R. A. NO. 7659)
- END -